Abstract
Soil salinization is a global issue regarding decline in productivity of agricultural fields. It is the major abiotic factor behind loss of crop production in arid to semi-arid zones. High temperature and low rainfall lead to accumulation of salt on the soil surface. Moreover, the low organic matter status of soils further worsens the soil conditions. All these factors have severely reduced soil productivity. There is need for some sustainable management practices for rehabilitation of degraded soils in arid zones. Application of organic matter under these conditions can restore the soil productivity. So, use of biochar for soil restoration under these conditions can be an efficient approach due to its long-term stability in soil. Thus, a pot experiment was conducted using a completely randomized design to evaluate the effect of three different modified biochar on properties of saline-sodic soil and growth of maize. Rice husk biochar (RHB), wheat straw biochar (WSB) and orange peel biochar (OPB) were applied after washing with distilled water. Results showed that all treatments improved the soil chemical properties as compared to saline-sodic control. However, maximum decrease in soil EC e (37.63%) and soil pH s (22.61%) was found with application of rice husk biochar @ 0.3% as compared with saline-sodic control. Similarly, maximum decrease in soil Na + (59.66%) and SAR (63.65%) was also observed in rice husk biochar @ 0.3% when compared with saline-sodic control. However, soil Ca 2+ +Mg 2+ was found maximum (39.82%) for rice husk biochar @ 0.15% as compared to saline-sodic control. Similarly, all treatments improved the maize growth as compared to saline-sodic control. rice husk biochar @ 0.3% showed maximum increase in plant height (51.82%). Similarly, maximum increase in shoot dry weight (160.24%), root dry biomass (169.52%), root length (15.87%), and chlorophyll contents (53.62%) was also found for rice husk biochar @ 0.3% as compared to saline-sodic control. rice husk biochar @ 0.3% was found most effective in improving maize growth and soil properties under saline-sodic conditions.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 10
Claim · model-written summary
rice husk biochar @ 0.3% produced decrease in soil EC e by 37.63% relative to saline-sodic control.
- Treatment
- rice husk biochar @ 0.3%e0
- Outcome
- soil EC ee0
- Direction
- decreasee0
- Value
- 37.63%e0
- Comparator
- saline-sodic controle0
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“However, maximum decrease in soil EC e (37.63%) and soil pH s (22.61%) was found with application of rice husk biochar @ 0.3% as compared with saline-sodic control.”
t0“in Maize under Saline-Sodic Conditions”
Claim · model-written summary
rice husk biochar @ 0.3% produced decrease in soil pH s by 22.61% relative to saline-sodic control.
- Treatment
- rice husk biochar @ 0.3%e0
- Outcome
- soil pH se0
- Direction
- decreasee0
- Value
- 22.61%e0
- Comparator
- saline-sodic controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“However, maximum decrease in soil EC e (37.63%) and soil pH s (22.61%) was found with application of rice husk biochar @ 0.3% as compared with saline-sodic control.”
t0“in Maize under Saline-Sodic Conditions”
Claim · model-written summary
rice husk biochar @ 0.3% produced decrease in soil Na + by 59.66% relative to saline-sodic control.
- Treatment
- rice husk biochar @ 0.3%e0
- Outcome
- soil Na +e0
- Direction
- decreasee0
- Value
- 59.66%e0
- Comparator
- saline-sodic controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Similarly, maximum decrease in soil Na + (59.66%) and SAR (63.65%) was also observed in rice husk biochar @ 0.3% when compared with saline-sodic control.”
t0“in Maize under Saline-Sodic Conditions”
Claim · model-written summary
rice husk biochar @ 0.3% produced decrease in SAR by 63.65% relative to saline-sodic control.
- Treatment
- rice husk biochar @ 0.3%e0
- Outcome
- SARe0
- Direction
- decreasee0
- Value
- 63.65%e0
- Comparator
- saline-sodic controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Similarly, maximum decrease in soil Na + (59.66%) and SAR (63.65%) was also observed in rice husk biochar @ 0.3% when compared with saline-sodic control.”
t0“in Maize under Saline-Sodic Conditions”
Claim · model-written summary
rice husk biochar @ 0.15% produced maximum in soil Ca 2+ +Mg 2+ by 39.82% relative to saline-sodic control.
- Treatment
- rice husk biochar @ 0.15%e0
- Outcome
- soil Ca 2+ +Mg 2+e0
- Direction
- maximume0
- Value
- 39.82%e0
- Comparator
- saline-sodic controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“However, soil Ca 2+ +Mg 2+ was found maximum (39.82%) for rice husk biochar @ 0.15% as compared to saline-sodic control.”
t0“in Maize under Saline-Sodic Conditions”
Claim · model-written summary
Rice husk biochar at 0.3% maximally increased maize plant height by 51.82% relative to saline-sodic control.
- Treatment
- rice husk biochar @ 0.3%e0
- Outcome
- plant heighte0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Value
- 51.82%e0
- Comparator
- saline-sodic controle2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“rice husk biochar @ 0.3% showed maximum increase in plant height (51.82%).”
t0“in Maize under Saline-Sodic Conditions”
e2“Similarly, all treatments improved the maize growth as compared to saline-sodic control.”
Claim · model-written summary
Rice husk biochar at 0.3% maximally increased maize shoot dry weight by 160.24% relative to saline-sodic control.
- Treatment
- rice husk biochar @ 0.3%e0
- Outcome
- shoot dry weighte0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Value
- 160.24%e0
- Comparator
- saline-sodic controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Similarly, maximum increase in shoot dry weight (160.24%), root dry biomass (169.52%), root length (15.87%), and chlorophyll contents (53.62%) was also found for rice husk biochar @ 0.3% as compared to saline-sodic control.”
t0“in Maize under Saline-Sodic Conditions”
Claim · model-written summary
Rice husk biochar at 0.3% maximally increased maize root dry biomass by 169.52% relative to saline-sodic control.
- Treatment
- rice husk biochar @ 0.3%e0
- Outcome
- root dry biomasse0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Value
- 169.52%e0
- Comparator
- saline-sodic controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Similarly, maximum increase in shoot dry weight (160.24%), root dry biomass (169.52%), root length (15.87%), and chlorophyll contents (53.62%) was also found for rice husk biochar @ 0.3% as compared to saline-sodic control.”
t0“in Maize under Saline-Sodic Conditions”
Claim · model-written summary
Rice husk biochar at 0.3% maximally increased maize root length by 15.87% relative to saline-sodic control.
- Treatment
- rice husk biochar @ 0.3%e0
- Outcome
- root lengthe0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Value
- 15.87%e0
- Comparator
- saline-sodic controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Similarly, maximum increase in shoot dry weight (160.24%), root dry biomass (169.52%), root length (15.87%), and chlorophyll contents (53.62%) was also found for rice husk biochar @ 0.3% as compared to saline-sodic control.”
t0“in Maize under Saline-Sodic Conditions”
Claim · model-written summary
Rice husk biochar at 0.3% maximally increased maize chlorophyll contents by 53.62% relative to saline-sodic control.
- Treatment
- rice husk biochar @ 0.3%e0
- Outcome
- chlorophyll contentse0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Value
- 53.62%e0
- Comparator
- saline-sodic controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Similarly, maximum increase in shoot dry weight (160.24%), root dry biomass (169.52%), root length (15.87%), and chlorophyll contents (53.62%) was also found for rice husk biochar @ 0.3% as compared to saline-sodic control.”
t0“in Maize under Saline-Sodic Conditions”
The same questions in other papers
Oryza sativa · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
30 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- negative
31 papers more in this group
See all 35 papers →Oryza sativa · physiology: pigments · Zea mays (maize)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
Oryza sativa · soil: chemistry · Zea mays (maize)Results agree
8 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
5 papers more in this group
See all 9 papers →Oryza sativa · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Results agree
25 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
22 papers more in this group
See all 26 papers →biochar · physiology: pigments · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
30 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
28 papers more in this group
See all 32 papers →biochar · soil: chemistry · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
63 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
66 papers more in this group
See all 70 papers →biochar · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
115 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
119 papers more in this group
See all 123 papers →biochar · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
179 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
186 papers more in this group
See all 190 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.